Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawing
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, for claim 16, the limitation of:
wherein the second display region is shaped as a closed or unclosed ring, and the first display region is shaped as circle.
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
For claim 16, the limitation of “wherein the second display region is shaped as a closed or unclosed ring, and the first display region is shaped as circle” is unclear language. It is not clear how the first display region is shaped as circle. Appropriate correction is needed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by
Wang (CN 111584582, cited by Applicant)
Regarding claim 19, Wang teaches a display panel (Fig.3-4) having a first display region and a second display region, the display panel comprising: a substrate 11; and a plurality of sub-pixels (P1r, P1b,P1g, P2r, P2b,P2g) provided on the substrate; wherein the plurality of sub-pixels comprise a first sub-pixel and a second sub-pixel; a distance between centers of the first sub-pixel and the adjacent second sub-pixel located in the first display region is less than a distance between centers of the first sub-pixel and the adjacent second sub-pixel located in the second display region (spacings between P1r, P1b,P1g AND P2r, P2b,P2g).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the Proir art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1,2-10 and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (CN 115513264 cited by Applicant) in view Wang (CN 111584582 cited by Applicant)
Regarding claim 1, Chen teaches a display panel (at least Fig.11,14,15), the display panel comprising: a substrate 01; a plurality of sub-pixels (red, green pixels in Chen) provided on the substrate; and a partition structure 04 provided on a side of the substrate, wherein the partition structure defines a plurality of partition openings (wherein 03 are indicated), wherein the plurality of sub-pixels comprise a first sub-pixel and a second sub-pixel (Fig.1a,1b).
Chen does not teach a display having a first display region and a second display region, the partition openings comprising a first opening located in the first display region and a second opening located in the second display region, wherein the plurality of sub-pixels are provided in the first opening and the second opening, respectively; a distance between centers of the first sub-pixel and the adjacent second sub-pixel located in the first display region is less than a distance between centers of the first sub-pixel and the adjacent second sub-pixel located in the second display region.
Wang teaches a display device (Fig.4) having a first display region and a second display region, the partition openings comprising a first opening located in the first display region and a second opening located in the second display region, wherein the plurality of sub-pixels are provided in the first opening and the second opening, respectively; a distance between centers of the first sub-pixel and the adjacent second sub-pixel located in the first display region (P1r,P1g,P1b) is less than a distance between centers of the first sub-pixel and the adjacent second sub-pixel located in the second display region (Abstract, P2r,P2g,P2b).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use the sub-pixel arrangement, as disclosed in Wang, in the device of Chen, in order to improve the overall aesthetics of the display.
Regarding claim 2, Chen in view of Wang teaches a display panel , wherein the plurality of sub-pixels further comprise a third sub-pixel; a distance between centers of the first sub-pixel and the adjacent third sub-pixel located in the first display region is less than a distance between centers of the first sub-pixel and the adjacent third sub-pixel located in the second display region; a distance between centers of the second sub-pixel and the adjacent third sub-pixel located in the first display region is less than a distance between centers of the second sub-pixel and the adjacent third sub-pixel located in the second display region (from the teachings of multiple sub-pixels in the first and second regions in Fig.4 of Wang, also see rejection in claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 3, Chen in view of Wang teaches a display panel, wherein in the first display region, a first spacing is defined between the first opening in which the first sub-pixel is provided and the adjacent first opening in which the second sub-pixel is provided; in the second display region, a second spacing is defined between the second opening in which the first sub-pixel is provided and the adjacent second opening in which the second sub-pixel is provided; the first spacing is less than the second spacing; in the first display region, a third spacing is defined between the first opening in which the first sub-pixel is provided and the adjacent first opening in which the third sub-pixel is provided; in the second display region, a fourth spacing is defined between the second opening in which the first sub-pixel is provided and the adjacent second opening in which the third sub-pixel is provided; the third spacing is less than the fourth spacing; in the first display region, a fifth spacing is defined between the first opening in which the second sub-pixel is provided and the adjacent first opening in which the third sub-pixel is provided; in the second display region, a sixth spacing is defined between the second opening in which the second sub-pixel is provided and the adjacent second opening in which the third sub-pixel is provided; the fifth spacing is less than the sixth spacing (from the teachings of multiple sub-pixels in the first and second regions in Fig.4 of Wang, also see rejection in claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 4, Chen in view of Wang teaches a display panel, wherein an area of the first opening in which the first sub-pixel is provided is less than or equal to an area of the second opening in which the first sub-pixel is provided; an area of the first opening in which the second sub-pixel is provided is less than or equal to an area of the second opening in which the second sub-pixel is provided; an area of the first opening in which the third sub-pixel is provided is less than or equal to an area of the second opening in which the third sub-pixel is provided (from the teachings of multiple sub-pixels sizes which are the areas of the openings, in the first and second regions in Fig.4 of Wang, also see rejection in claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 5, Chen in view of Wang teaches a display panel, wherein a distance between centers of two adjacent first sub-pixels located in the first display region is less than a distance between centers of two adjacent first sub-pixels located in the second display region; a distance between centers of two adjacent second sub-pixels located in the first display region is less than a distance between centers of two adjacent second sub-pixels located in the second display region; a distance between centers of two adjacent third sub-pixels located in the first display region is less than that a distance between centers of two adjacent third sub-pixels located in the second display region (from the teachings of multiple sub-pixels in the first and second regions in Fig.4 of Wang, also see rejection in claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 6, Chen in view of Wang teaches a display panel, wherein each sub-pixel comprises: a first electrode portion 03 (Chen); a light-emitting function 05 portion provided on a side of the first electrode portion away from the substrate; and a second electrode portion 06 provided on a side of the light-emitting function portion away from the substrate.
Regarding claim 7, Chen in view of Wang teaches a display panel, further comprising a pixel definition layer 02 (Chen) provided on the same side of the substrate with the partition structure, wherein the pixel definition layer comprises a plurality of pixel definition openings, and the light-emitting function portion is at least partially located within the pixel definition opening (openings between 02 in Chen).
Regarding claim 8, Chen in view of Wang teaches a display panel, wherein an area of the pixel definition opening in which the light-emitting function portion corresponding to the first sub-pixel is provided in the first display region is less than or equal to an area of the pixel definition opening in which the light-emitting function portion corresponding to the first sub-pixel is provided in the second display region; an area of the pixel definition opening in which the light-emitting function portion corresponding to the second sub-pixel is provided in the first display region is less than or equal to an area of the pixel definition opening in which the light-emitting function portion corresponding to the second sub-pixel is provided in the second display region; an area of the pixel definition opening in which the light-emitting function portion corresponding to the third sub-pixel is provided in the first display region is less than or equal to an area of the pixel definition opening in which the light-emitting function portion corresponding to the third sub-pixel is provided in the second display region (from Fig.4 of Wang in combined teachings of Chen in view of Wang).
Regarding claim 9, Chen in view of Wang teaches a display panel, wherein the partition structure comprises a conductive material (041,042,043 in Chen), and the second electrode portion is electrically connected to the partition structure (the second electrode layer 06 will cover the whole isolation column 04).
Regarding claim 10, Chen in view of Wang teaches a display panel, wherein the first openings are arranged in correspondence with the pixel definition openings located in the first display region, and an orthographic projection of the pixel definition opening located in the first display region onto the substrate is located within an orthographic projection of the corresponding first opening onto substrate; the second openings are arranged in correspondence with the pixel definition openings located in the second display region, and an orthographic projection of the pixel definition opening located in the second display region onto the substrate is located within an orthographic projection of the corresponding second opening onto substrate (from the teachings of Chen wherein the spacing between the pixel defining layer 02 that correspond to the opening that holds the light emitting elements, in the combined structure of Chen in view of Wang).
Regarding claim 15, Chen in view of Wang teaches a display panel (Fig.4 in Wang), wherein the second display region surrounds at least part of the first display region.
Regarding claim 16, Chen in view of Wang teaches a display panel, wherein the second display region is shaped as a closed or unclosed ring, and the first display region is shaped as circle (see objection to Drawings and 112 rejection above).
Regarding claim 17, Chen in view of Wang teaches a display panel , wherein a display panel having a first display region and a second display region, the display panel comprising: a substrate; a plurality of sub-pixels provided on the substrate; and a partition structure provided on a side of the substrate, wherein the partition structure defines a plurality of partition openings, the partition openings comprising a first opening located in the first display region and a second opening located in the second display region, wherein the plurality of sub-pixels are provided in the first openings and the second opening, respectively, wherein the plurality of sub-pixels comprise a plurality of first sub-pixels; a distance between centers of two adjacent first sub-pixels located in the first display region is less than a distance between centers of two adjacent first sub-pixels located in the second display region (See the rejection in claim 1 above, the same citations as in the rejection of claim 1 apply).
Regarding claim 18, Chen in view of Wang teaches a display panel ,wherein the plurality of sub-pixels comprise a plurality of second sub-pixels, a distance between centers of two adjacent second sub-pixels located in the first display region is less than a distance between centers of two adjacent second sub-pixels located in the second display region; the plurality of sub-pixels comprise a plurality of third sub-pixels; a distance between centers of two adjacent third sub-pixels located in the first display region is less than a distance between centers of two adjacent third sub-pixels located in the second display region (the arrangement of multiple sub-pixels in the first and second regions with varying spacing/densities in Fig.4 of Wang).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (CN 115513264) in view Wang (CN 111584582) and further in view of Andou (US 20170097535 A1)
Regarding claim 11, Chen in view of Wang teaches that the openings of the pixel definition layers fulfill the size limitations as claimed for the first and second region, however, Chen in view of Wang does not teach the boundary that is selected within the opening as claimed, towards ascertaining the size of the pixel definition openings and as to which point to which point in the opening is the size of the opening considered as the sub-pixel are? within the first and second regions.
However, it is well known in the art to have a shape of the pixel definition opening to have slant boundaries and flat center portions and it is a matter of design to select which part of these pixel definition openings having slant ends and flat center portions to be considered towards the sub-pixel size having different sizes in the first and second regions.
Andou teaches a boundary selected within the pixel definition opening, to be considered as the sub-pixel/light emitting size, as shown by dashed lines below:
PNG
media_image1.png
389
513
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
728
566
media_image2.png
Greyscale
While the dashed portions shown above are the openings that can be considered as the sub-pixel sizes that vary in the first and second regions as claimed, the rest of the pixel defining opening as shown below by arrows, can be considered as constant, as claimed.
PNG
media_image3.png
355
496
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore, from the teachings of Andou, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use the a boundary of the orthographic projection of the pixel definition opening onto the substrate in the first display region and a boundary of the orthographic projection of the corresponding first opening onto the substrate have a first distance defined therebetween; a boundary of the orthographic projection of the pixel definition opening onto the substrate in the second display region and a boundary of the orthographic projection of the corresponding second opening onto the substrate have a second distance defined therebetween; and wherein the first distance is equal to the second distance in order to use the center boundary within the pixel defining opening as the light emitting element that varies in size in the first and second regions for the benefit of providing an integrated sense of display ([0029] in Andou).
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (CN 115513264) in view Wang (CN 111584582) and further in view of Fukuda (US 20230255063 A1)
Regarding claim 12, Chen in view of Wang teaches the invention set forth in claim 6 above, but is silent regarding the partition structure comprises an isolating body and a blocking portion located on a side of the isolating body away from the substrate; wherein an orthographic projection of a top surface of the isolating body onto the substrate is located within an orthographic projection of a bottom surface of the blocking portion onto the substrate; the isolating body comprises a conductive material; the second electrode portion is electrically connected to the isolating body.
Fukuda teaches a display device wherein the partition structure comprises an isolating body (61/61a, at least Fig 5) and a blocking portion (62) located on a side of the isolating body away from the substrate; wherein an orthographic projection of a top surface of the isolating body onto the substrate is located within an orthographic projection of a bottom surface of the blocking portion onto the substrate; the isolating body comprises a conductive material (61; [0065]) the second electrode portion UE1a is electrically connected to the isolating body 61 ([0069]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use the shape of the partition structure, as disclosed in Fukuda, in the device of Chen in view of Wang, in order to effectively prevent degradation of light extraction efficiency of the OLED and deterioration in visibility of the OLED (Advantage section of Fukuda).
Regarding claim 13, Chen in view of Wang teaches the display panel, wherein the partition structure further comprises a bearing portion (600 in Fig.5 of Fukuda) located on a side of the isolating body 610 adjacent to the substrate; the orthographic projection of the bottom surface of the isolating body onto the substrate is located within an orthographic projection of a top surface of the bearing portion onto the substrate; the bearing portion comprises a conductive material; the second electrode portion UE1a is electrically connected to the bearing portion.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen (CN 115513264) in view Wang (CN 111584582) and Fukuda (US 20230255063 A1) and further in view of Kawamura (US 20240334767 A1)
Regarding claim 14, Chen in view of Wang and Fukuda teaches the invention set forth in claim 13 above, but is silent regarding the second electrode portion covers part of the top surface and at least part of side surface of the bearing portion.
Kawamura teaches a display device wherein the second electrode portion (UE3/UE2 in Fig.3; [0053]) covers part of the top surface and at least part of side surface of the bearing portion 61 (Fig.3, 5-7, 22,23,29, 611 in Fig.14).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use the shape of the bearing portion, as disclosed in Kawamura, in the device of Chen in view of Wang and Fukuda, in order for the electrode to be satisfactorily electrically connected to the bottom layer of the partition.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Fatima Farokhrooz whose telephone number is (571)-272-6043. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday- Friday, 9 am - 5 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s Supervisor, James Greece can be reached on (571) 272-3711.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Fatima N Farokhrooz/
Examiner, Art Unit 2875
Prosecution Insights